In re Huntenberg
Citations
- 153 F. 768
- 1907 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 303
Syllabus
<p>1. Infants — Contracts—Avoidance.</p> <p>A contract of an infant is voidable only; tbe infant being entitled to elect whether or not he will avoid the contract, either during minority or within a reasonable time after he reaches majority.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 27, Infants, § 151.]</p> <p>2. Same — Consideration—Return.</p> <p>On avoiding a contract, an infant must return the consideration, so far as it may be in his possession.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 27, Infants, § 157.]</p> <p>3. Bankruptcy — Preferred Claims.</p> <p>Where an infant obtained a bill of sale from a bankrupt to secure advances, and after his claim of preference by virtue of such bill of sale had been disallowed he elected to disaffirm the same because of his infancy, he was then only entitled to prove his claim for advances as a general creditor.</p> <p>4. Same — Wages.</p> <p>A claimant against a bankrupt’s estate is not entitled to a preference for wages earned more than three months prior to the commencement of the bankruptcy proceedings, as provided by Bankr. Act July 1, 1898, e. 541, ■ § 64, subd. 4, 30 Stat. 563 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3447].</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- noting “inherent weaknesses in the rationale of the Mercoid decision”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Chatfield
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.